Who’s Got the Better Fruit?
Recently, I had the privilege of hearing Dr. Lamma Mansour speak at the George Fox Woolman Peacemaking Forum on Bearing Witness: A Christian Palestinian Cry for Justice and Peace. One moment stood out during the Q&A when a frustrated man voiced concerns about evangelical responses to the Gaza situation. Dr. Mansour, instead of offering a direct answer, asked: “What are the fruits of this theology?”
Jesus warns in Matthew 7:16 (ESV): “You will recognize them by their fruit.”
Dr. Mansour’s question has lingered with me, prompting reflection on any system of thought. This week, I’ve applied it to postmodernism: What are its fruits?
Stephen R.C. Hicks, in Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault, explores the fruits of postmodernism—tracing its origins, development, and the strategies behind its modern application. Hicks writes, “Postmodernism, therefore, is a comprehensive philosophical and cultural movement. It identifies its target— modernism and its realization in the Enlightenment and its legacy— and it mounts powerful arguments against all of the essential elements of modernism.”[1]
Hicks traces the transitions from pre-modernism to modernism, culminating in postmodernism, providing a comprehensive analysis of how each phase challenged and reshaped philosophical and cultural thought.
For the sake of brevity, I will omit a discussion of pre-modernism, briefly touch on modernism, and examine postmodern ideals, particularly in relation to leadership, with a specific focus on the RARE Leadership model as an alternative framework.
Modernism and the Emergence of Postmodernism
Modernism is deeply influenced by the Enlightenment and rooted in the philosophies of thinkers such as Francis Bacon, René Descartes, and John Locke. Hicks notes, “The Enlightenment developed those features of the modern world that many now take largely for granted—liberal politics and free markets, scientific progress, and technological innovation. All four of those institutions depend upon confidence in the power of reason.”[2]
In The Thinker’s Guide to Socratic Questioning, Paul and Elder delineate what they consider universal standards for intellectual reasoning—criteria by which thinking is evaluated by thoughtful and discerning individuals. They argue that these standards include, but are not limited to, clarity, precision, accuracy, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, and fairness.”[3] Furthermore, Paul and Elder emphasize that skilled thinkers actively apply these intellectual standards in their daily reasoning. They are not only capable of recognizing when others fail to adhere to them, but also when they themselves fall short in their thinking.[4]
In a similar vein, Hicks describes, “The broadly Enlightenment conception of reason— that human reason is a faculty of the individual, that it is competent to know reality objectively, that it is capable of functioning autonomously and in accordance with universal principles.”[5]
A detailed discussion of the Counter-Enlightenment movement is beyond the scope of this analysis; however, the perceived shortcomings of modernism—particularly its emphasis on reason—created a vacuum that postmodernism ultimately filled. Hicks asserts, “Postmodernism is the end result of the Counter-Enlightenment attack on reason.”[6] He further contends that, in the postmodern view, reason is not only regarded as subjective but also as fundamentally inadequate.[7]
As I read through Hicks’ analysis, I was deeply unsettled by his portrayal of postmodern rhetorical strategies. He writes, “Accordingly, postmodernism recasts the nature of rhetoric: Rhetoric is persuasion in the absence of cognition.”[8] Hicks further argues that postmodernists wield rhetoric as a tool to silence opposition, privileging emotion over reason. He describes how postmodern thought views the modern world’s lessons as revealing that reality is inaccessible, knowledge is unattainable, human potential is diminished, and ethical and political ideals are hollow. The inevitable psychological response, according to Hicks, is one of anger and despair.”[9]
Looking for an alternative model
Once again, I find myself asking: What are the fruits of postmodernism? I am unsettled by postmodern thought, particularly Michel Foucault’s expressed desire to erase himself, which he extends to humanity.[10] While further exploration of his perspective could be valuable, my immediate reaction is one of unease, especially when contrasted with the Christian belief in the inherent dignity of each person.
Postmodernism and Christian thought may both recognize the need for transformation, but they approach it differently. Postmodernism often focuses on deconstruction and challenging established identities, while Christianity emphasizes transformation through renewal in Christ (Romans 12:2). This raises important questions about how postmodernism intersects with leadership models like RARE Leadership, from a Christian perspective.
The RARE Leadership model, which emphasizes four uncommon habits—(1) remain relational, (2) act like yourself, (3) return to joy, and (4) endure hardship[11] —rests on the foundational equation of Identity + Belonging = Transformation[12]. In contrast to the traditional equation of Reason + Good Choices = Transformation[13], Warner and Wilder propose that true transformation is driven by identity and a sense of belonging. They explain:
Here is the paradox of belonging and identity. All human group identities are, in a sense, ‘deformed’ because we are fallen human beings. The RARE paradigm only works because we continually seek to bring our individual and group identities to a higher standard that, as Christians, we see in the life of Jesus.[14]
Where postmodernism tends to focus on deconstructing identities, the RARE Leadership model seeks to create environments where leaders, drawing from a common sense of identity and belonging, grow through relational connections. Warner and Wilder emphasize:
Transformation is created when the weak and the strong interact with one another in a culture in which they can share a common identity and a common sense of belonging.[15]
While postmodernism challenges identities and rejects reason, leadership models like RARE emphasize transformation through identity and belonging in Christ. RARE integrates reason with relational growth and emotional intelligence, offering an alternative to postmodern skepticism. By fostering unity and connection, RARE nurtures meaningful change and growth, encouraging reasoned engagement in the pursuit of truth—this is the good fruit that leads to transformation.
[1] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault (Expanded Edition; Ockham’s Razor, 2011), 31, Kindle Edition.
[2] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 33, Kindle Edition.
[3] Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Thinker’s Guide to Socratic Questioning (Thinker’s Guide Library; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2014), 9, Kindle Edition.
[4] Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Thinker’s Guide to Socratic Questioning, 9, Kindle Edition.
[5] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault (Expanded Edition; Ockham’s Razor, 2011), 40, Kindle Edition.
[6] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 38, Kindle Edition.
[7] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 53, Kindle Edition.
[8] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 48, Kindle Edition.
[9] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 215, Kindle Edition.
[10] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 212, Kindle Edition.
[11] Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, 212, Kindle Edition.
[12] Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder, Rare Leadership: 4 Uncommon Habits for Increasing Trust, Joy, and Engagement in the People You Lead (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2016), 8, Kindle.
[13] Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder, Rare Leadership, 46, Kindle.
[14] Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder, Rare Leadership, 44, Kindle.
[15] Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder, Rare Leadership, 58, Kindle.
About the Author
Elysse Burns
18 responses to “Who’s Got the Better Fruit?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Elysse, I’m certainly not an expert in postmodernism, but I wonder if humility is a fruit of postmodernism? If we don’t believe that everything can be figured out, are we, by nature, more humble? I would love to hear how you agree or disagree!
Hi Christy, I’m certainly no expert in postmodernism, but I suppose humility could be one of its fruits. In the spirit of postmodernism, I could say, I guess it’s all subjective—just kidding.
When I think of humility, I’m reminded of Psalm 131:1, where David expresses a posture of humility before God, refusing to be consumed by matters beyond his understanding. Throughout human history, we’ve wrestled with the tension between humility and arrogance. That struggle is nothing new. Arrogance and oppression did not start with modernism. Long before the Enlightenment, ancient empires and medieval hierarchies demonstrated patterns of domination, exclusion, and power struggles. Modernism may have introduced new frameworks for these tendencies—such as an overconfidence in reason, progress, or grand narratives—but it did not create them.
When considering postmodernism, I almost hear the echo of Pilate’s words to Jesus: “What is truth?”—a question that, in his case, seemed more cynical than sincere. My concern with the heart of postmodernism is that in its embrace of not knowing, it often takes a step further—suggesting that no absolute truth exists and that everything is purely subjective. That’s where I hesitate.
In studying cross-cultural psychology, I find myself drawn to a moderate universalist perspective—recognizing cultural differences while holding that some human truths transcend them. Research suggests that while culture shapes the beliefs and assumptions behind our reasoning, it doesn’t fundamentally alter how we process information. This view affirms that, despite our diverse ways of thinking, there are shared cognitive foundations that connect us.
And there I go again, writing more than you probably wanted to read.
Elysse,
You say that ” Postmodernism often focuses on deconstruction and challenging established identities.” Have you seen this play out in your context in Africa? Beyond identifying as Muslim, I have no idea what established identities would be.
Hi Elysse, I had a similar question to Jeff’s, so I’ll tag on here. What affects of post-modernism have you seen in our host culture? What are strategies we can take in sharing the Gospel within these cultural and social confines?
Hi Kari, I haven’t seen postmodern ideas play out much in our country. The most I’ve observed are brief moments where identities are questioned—maybe a few critical remarks—but nothing goes beyond that. There’s no lasting change or significant pushback. One example that comes to mind is the role of tribes. There’s still a strong emphasis on tribal identity here, but many in the younger generation see it as an unhealthy practice. However, they often feel powerless to do anything about it because of the immense social pressure rooted in tradition. Essentially, their solution seems to be to wait for the older generation to pass on, which is a response we hear frequently. Can you think of any examples of postmodern ideas in our host country?
Lately, I’ve been reflecting on how our country seems to be caught between pre-modernism and modernism. One aspect of modernism that I truly appreciate is its emphasis on the individual. Rather than interpreting this focus as an excuse for unchecked freedom, the gospel offers a powerful counterpoint by highlighting the inherent worth and dignity of each person. I believe that modernism’s emphasis on the individual can complement the gospel message, providing a deeper understanding of human dignity and purpose. This is a message I feel contrasts with what many hear here. I believe we have an important role in continually reminding people of their inherent dignity and worth.
Hi Jeff, I haven’t really seen postmodern ideas play out much in my country. The most I’ve witnessed are brief moments where identities are questioned—maybe a few critical comments are made—but nothing beyond that. There’s no real change or pushback. One example that comes to mind is the role of tribes. There’s still a heavy emphasis placed on tribal identity here, but many in the younger generation view it as an unhealthy practice. However, they often feel like they can’t do much about it due to the immense social pressure rooted in tradition. Essentially, their solution seems to be to wait for the older generation to pass on, which is a response I hear often.
Hi Elysee,
In your opinion, how can socialism be reimagined or implemented in a way that aligns with the ethics of Jesus Christ, rather than being grounded in atheistic principles?
Hi Shela, One verse that clearly comes to mind is Acts 4:32-35: “Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.”
When I think of “socialism” rooted in Christ rather than atheism, this passage is what it would look like. I haven’t witnessed it firsthand, but I’ve heard stories of local churches in the Global South that embody glimpses of this same spirit of commonality. I’m not sure what this would look like in practice within the Western Church, though. At this point, it feels unlikely without a significant spiritual and systemic shift.
Elysse, I appreciate your attention to the contrast between postmodernism’s fruits, particularly its tendency toward deconstruction and despair, and the RARE Leadership model’s emphasis on transformation through identity and belonging. Given your reflections, how might Christian leaders practically foster environments of belonging and relational connection without falling into the rhetorical traps of postmodernism—especially when engaging with a culture steeped in skepticism toward truth and identity?
Hi Chad, One thing I’ve deeply appreciated from Dr. Clark is his reminder that we are called to offer an alternative. This has stayed with me, especially when the gospel seems at odds with cultural narratives. The gospel transcends postmodern rhetoric, and I’ve learned not to try to fit it into those frameworks. It stands on its own, offering something radically different.
While I wouldn’t say I live in a postmodern country, the dominant religion here often opposes many of my beliefs, leading to rhetoric that can feel confining. I’ve had to stop and remind myself that I’m not trapped—I’m free in Christ. The gospel offers a freedom that surpasses the narratives around me.
My best advice is to pray for wisdom and divine discernment, trusting that God will soften hearts to receive His truth. Prayer has been invaluable, bringing peace as I move forward. As Christian leaders, we must cultivate environments of prayer where we can seek God’s guidance together, asking for His help in navigating challenging climates and for divine appointments with those ready to embrace His alternative.
Elysse,
I love the idea of looking for the fruit. What a great response by that doctor! I want to know what was behind the question in the first place now. You mention deconstruction in regards to postmodernism. Deconstructing one’s faith has become more common place and I think (speaking personally) it has been very helpful. It has made me who I am today. BUT, and it is a big but, we can’t decontruct ourselves towards that emptiness but rather to a more kingdom centered person.
Hi Adam, I think you can imagine what she was responding to—Christianity and Nationalism, particularly the unquestioning allegiance of evangelicals to Israel. I agree with you that deconstructing one’s faith can be a helpful process; it’s been transformative for me as well. When I think of Christ-centered deconstruction, I’m reminded of Paul’s words, “I die daily.” To me, this kind of deconstruction is about shedding the old self and putting on the new in Christ. It’s a process that feels distinct from the deconstruction tied to postmodern ideals, rooted in a transformation of the heart rather than a rejection of meaning.
Hi Elysse, Thanks for the connection to RARE Leadership. Moving to a place where you did not know but one person, you had to start pretty much from scratch to build relationships. Did that experience help you understand RARE leadership in a different way and how might be able to help others to be intentional to be in relationship with others?
Hi Diane, Moving to the East Coast really deepened my understanding of the importance of prioritizing relationships. You might not know this about Pennsylvanians, but they are incredibly private people. I quickly learned that without a lifelong connection, it was hard to break through and build close relationships. But I was up for the challenge! I carried this lesson with me to North Africa, where I found people to be equally, if not more, private. I’m not sure if this experience shaped my view of RARE leadership differently, but it certainly affirmed beliefs I already held, and I was grateful to have both the vocabulary and the acronym to articulate them.
Hi Elysse, I also appreciated the connection to Rare Leadership. If you could think of one element of Rare Leadership how can one in a postmodern environment better embrace identity?
Hi Daren, In RARE Leadership, the authors briefly touch on hesed or agape love, which I believe is essential when navigating postmodernism and our identity as followers of Christ. Agape love is a sacrificial love that pursues relationship, regardless of the challenges it may bring. I must admit, I’m still growing in this area. One aspect I’ve particularly appreciated from Dr. Clark is his reminder that we are called to offer an alternative in this current climate. This idea has resonated deeply with me, especially when the gospel stands in contrast to cultural narratives. The gospel transcends postmodern rhetoric, and I’ve learned not to try to force it into those frameworks. It stands on its own, offering something radically different. I believe that when we are rooted in Christ, and our identity is reflected in agape love, that’s when true change begins. However, that change starts within us first.
Elysse, appreciate the focus on fruit. I had to take stock that post-modernists I know are not all nihilist, but they are humanistic, tribal, and longing for a better earthly existence beyond the obstacles that “other groups” have created for them.
If RARE leadership are the behaviours of good leadership in response to what’s happening around us with relationships, a sense of deep joy and belonging, what are some tie-ins that enable this to work in a Postmodernist framework?
Hi Joel, Dr. Clark’s reminder that we are called to offer an alternative has stayed with me, especially when the gospel seems at odds with cultural narratives. In a postmodern world, where truth is often fluid and relationships feel fragmented, the gospel stands apart—rooted in truth and love. RARE Leadership aligns with this by emphasizing relational leadership, deep joy, and belonging.
Rather than simply critiquing postmodernism, we are called to embody a gospel-centered life that transcends cultural expectations. Agape love, as highlighted in RARE Leadership, is a sacrificial love that seeks relationship despite challenges. This is crucial in a world that values individualism and skepticism.
I’m still growing in this, but I believe real change begins when we are rooted in Christ and our identity manifests in agape love. By building authentic relationships and fostering belonging, we live out the alternative Dr. Clark speaks of. RARE Leadership provides a framework for leading in a postmodern world—not by imposing control, but by sacrificially loving others.